heterogeneity-investigation

star 331

Explain why different studies reach different conclusions — heterogeneity investigation protocol. Budget: 30 studies, 30 effect sizes, 50 web searches.

yogsoth-ai By yogsoth-ai schedule Updated 6/16/2026

name: heterogeneity-investigation description: 'Explain why different studies reach different conclusions — heterogeneity investigation protocol. Budget: 30 studies, 30 effect sizes, 50 web searches.' dependencies: tactics: - effect-size-extraction - evidence-synthesis-planning - quality-assessment-protocol sops: - data-extraction-form - effect-size-planning - heterogeneity-source-analysis - inclusion-criteria-design - meta-analysis-synthesis - pico-formulation - publication-bias-assessment - risk-of-bias-assessment - sensitivity-analysis-design

Heterogeneity Investigation Strategy

Design a protocol to investigate and explain between-study heterogeneity — why studies of the same question reach different conclusions.

Purpose

When a meta-analysis reveals substantial heterogeneity (I2 > 50%, significant Q-test, large tau2), this strategy designs the investigation protocol: subgroup analyses, meta-regression, moderator identification, and outlier diagnostics. Produces the investigation plan, not the computation.

Budget

Resource Floor Target
Studies identified 20 30
Effect sizes extracted 20 30
Web searches 35 50
Moderator candidates 5 10+
Quality assessments 15 30

Budget gate: cannot exit until 80% of floor met.

State Ledger

<HARD-GATE>
| Metric | Current | Floor | Target | Status |
|--------|---------|-------|--------|--------|
| Studies found | 0 | 20 | 30 | BLOCKED |
| Effect sizes planned | 0 | 20 | 30 | BLOCKED |
| Web searches done | 0 | 35 | 50 | BLOCKED |
| Moderators identified | 0 | 5 | 10+ | BLOCKED |
| Quality assessed | 0 | 15 | 30 | BLOCKED |
</HARD-GATE>

Available Tactics

Tactic When to Use
effect-size-extraction Extract effect sizes with full study characteristics
quality-assessment-protocol Assess whether quality explains heterogeneity
evidence-synthesis-planning Plan subgroup and meta-regression models

Available SOPs

SOP When to Use
pico-formulation Frame the heterogeneity question
inclusion-criteria-design Broad inclusion to capture variation
effect-size-planning Standardize for comparability
data-extraction-form Rich moderator variable extraction
risk-of-bias-assessment RoB as potential moderator
heterogeneity-source-analysis Core SOP — classify heterogeneity sources
sensitivity-analysis-design Outlier removal, influence diagnostics
publication-bias-assessment Bias as heterogeneity source
meta-analysis-synthesis Final investigation protocol

Execution Guidance

  1. Frame — Run pico-formulation emphasizing variation in P/I/C/O
  2. Scope — Run inclusion-criteria-design with broad criteria (capture variation)
  3. Search — Systematic search + web research on known moderators
  4. Extract — Use effect-size-extraction with rich study-level covariates
  5. Hypothesize — Run heterogeneity-source-analysis to generate moderator hypotheses
  6. Assess — Use quality-assessment-protocol (RoB as moderator)
  7. Plan — Use evidence-synthesis-planning for subgroup + meta-regression
  8. Synthesize — Run meta-analysis-synthesis for investigation protocol

Web searches focus on domain knowledge about why results might differ (methodological, clinical, statistical heterogeneity).

Output Format

protocol:
  question: [Why do studies of X reach different conclusions?]
  heterogeneity_metrics: [I2, tau2, Q-test, prediction interval]
  moderator_candidates:
    clinical: [population, intervention details, outcome timing]
    methodological: [study design, RoB, measurement tools]
    statistical: [effect size type, analysis method, sample size]
  investigation_plan:
    subgroup_analyses: [categorical moderators]
    meta_regression: [continuous moderators]
    outlier_diagnostics: [influence analysis, Baujat plot]
    sensitivity: [leave-one-out, cumulative by quality]
  a_priori_hypotheses: [pre-specified moderator hypotheses]
  multiple_testing: [correction strategy]
  reporting: PRISMA-2020 + heterogeneity reporting guidelines

Available Tactics

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

Tactic When to use
effect-size-extraction Systematically extract effect sizes and conditions from papers for meta-analytic synthesis
evidence-synthesis-planning Plan the statistical synthesis approach — model selection, heterogeneity strategy, and reporting
quality-assessment-protocol Methodological quality and bias risk assessment of included studies using validated tools

Available SOPs

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

SOP When to use
data-extraction-form Design structured data extraction form for systematic meta-analysis data collection
effect-size-planning Determine effect size types and calculation methods for meta-analytic synthesis
heterogeneity-source-analysis Identify and classify sources of between-study heterogeneity (clinical, methodological, statistical)
inclusion-criteria-design Define inclusion/exclusion criteria for systematic study selection in meta-analysis
meta-analysis-synthesis Produce final meta-analysis protocol document assembling all planning outputs into PRISMA-compliant protocol
pico-formulation Construct PICO/PECO framework for the meta-analysis research question
publication-bias-assessment Plan funnel plots, Egger's test, trim-and-fill, p-curve, and selection model analyses for publication bias
risk-of-bias-assessment Assess methodological bias using RoB2, PROBAST, or QUADAS-2 validated tools
sensitivity-analysis-design Design leave-one-out, influence diagnostics, subgroup analyses, and robustness checks
Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/yogsoth-ai/de-anthropocentric-research-engine --skill heterogeneity-investigation
Repository Details
star Stars 331
call_split Forks 25
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator